According to the Associated Press, Bennett learned in September that Deehan’s charter school was set to receive a ‘C’. Deehan had just made a $50,000 contribution to Bennett in late June.

Emails obtained by The Associated Press show Bennett and his staff scrambled last fall to ensure influential donor Christel DeHaan’s school received an “A,” despite poor test scores in algebra that initially earned it a “C.”

“They need to understand that anything less than an A for Christel House compromises all of our accountability work,” Bennett wrote in a Sept. 12 email to then-chief of staff Heather Neal, who is now Gov. Mike Pence’s chief lobbyist.

“This will be a HUGE problem for us,” Bennett wrote in a Sept. 12, 2012 email to Neal.

Neal fired back a few minutes later, “Oh, crap. We cannot release until this is resolved.”

By Sept. 13, (grading director Jon) Gubera unveiled it was a 2.9, or a “C.”

A weeklong behind-the-scenes scramble ensued among Bennett, assistant superintendent Dale Chu, Gubera, Neal and other top staff at the Indiana Department of Education. They examined ways to lift Christel House from a “C” to an “A,” including adjusting the presentation of color charts to make a high “B” look like an “A” and changing the grade just for Christel House.

It’s not clear from the emails exactly how Gubera changed the grading formula, but they do show DeHaan’s grade jumping twice.

By September 21, Christel House had their A. Here’s how:

Bennett wrote to staff twice in four days, directly inquiring about DeHaan’s status. Gubera broke the news after the second note that “terrible” 10th grade algebra results had “dragged down their entire school.”

Bennett called the situation “very frustrating and disappointing” in an email that day.

“I am more than a little miffed about this,” Bennett wrote. “I hope we come to the meeting today with solutions and not excuses and/or explanations for me to wiggle myself out of the repeated lies I have told over the past six months.”

.When requested a status update Sept. 14, his staff alerted him that the new school grade, a 3.50, was painfully close to an “A.” Then-deputy chief of staff Marcie Brown wrote that the state might not be able to “legally” change the cutoff for an “A.”

“We can revise the rule,” Bennett responded.

Over the next week, his top staff worked arduously to get Christel House its “A.” By Sept. 21, Christel House had jumped to a 3.75. Gubera resigned shortly afterward.

Dehaan made a final $15,000 donation to Bennett’s campaign five weeks later on November 1, 2012. One of Bennett’s trouble shooters in the grade change, Chu, is now part of Bennett’s Florida staff.

New post on Diane Ravitch's blog

I posted a link to this article yesterday. It is hilarious. It is a conference call in which Ben Austin, the leader of Parent Revolution, talks to Congressman George Miller, the senior Democrat in the House of Representatives. P-Rev is funded by the Walton Family Foundation, the Gates Foundation, and the Broad Foundation. Miller is beloved by the charter lobby and has received generous campaign contributions by the Wall Street hedge fund group DFER (Democrats for Education Reform).

Unfortunately, the link was taken down by someone at MyEdNext, and the article is no longer available online. I asked the author for permission to print the article, and she sent it to me for your reading pleasure.

Here it is.

'Parents Can Only Listen'

I attended a conference call today initiated and led by Ben Austin, Executive Director of Parent Revolution, to honor "National Parents Day." The call from start to finish focused on the complexity of the parent trigger law, the controversy, the process, and the status of California schools.

Although the call's password was "Parents," parents couldn't ask questions - only reporters could. Perhaps Parent Revolution should consider a name change or a re-branding.

I'm confused.

A few minutes into the call, a personable Ben Austin stated, "We've been outspent 100 to 1 by opponents of parent trigger." Florida parents were opponents of parent trigger. I'm certain the money depleted from my personal savings account and those of the dynamo parents from Stop Parent Trigger and Fund Education Florida and others wouldn't total a fraction of what Parent Revolution spent. I would have asked him to elaborate if parents were allowed to participate in the Parent Revolution, National Parents Day conference call but, we weren't.

Austin later stated that there is well-funded opposition to Parent Revolution to the tune of $8 billion. Wow! As parents we shared packages of almonds and granola bars in the senate gallery vs. eating lunch outside because we spent our savings on travel expenses, child care, and shared hotel rooms. Maybe whoever has that $8B can buy us lunch in Tallahassee next year?

Austin reflected, ”I wish I had the army of lobbyists our opponents had.” The Florida lobbyist directory shows that the California firm, Parent Revolution, has three lobbyists registered in Florida along with Students First’s five Florida lobbyists, added to the eight from Jeb Bush’s Foundation. That’s 16 paid lobbyists not to mention Florida’s Charter Consortium, the Charter Alliance Group and each individual charter with multiple lobbyists who all advocated for parent trigger. That represents an estimated 220 paid lobbyists. I think Mr. Austin has his army in place, don't you?

Many charter chains register as "non profits" then set up "for-profit" firms to handle facilities, food services, operations. Does Green Dot charters have for profit firms operating their schools? If so, does Ben Austin oppose them? For-profit charter management is almost always the case in Florida. Mr. Austin, that's not a conspiracy theory--that's a fact.

I'm confused. Grassroots?

Mr. Austin talked about Parent Revolution being a grassroots effort. In 2012, Parent Revolution's funders included: the Broad Foundation, Walton Family Foundation, Gates Foundation, and the Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisers. This is anything but 'grassroots.'

If Florida parents, who are in the trenches at schools, in board meetings, in the state capitol fighting for all children, could have 10% of Parent Revolution's funds, we'd put education back on track in our state. I'd appreciate it if Mr. Austin would mount a campaign for that.

I'm confused. Parents represent the status quo?

Also participating in this call was Parent Revolution's 'hero' Congressman George Miller-D (Martinez). In a quote released the day before Rep Miller said, "We can no longer pay lip service to parental involvement in schools. Instead parents must stand up and say that the status quo isn't good enough for their children." Say what?

Isn't Rep Miller still the head of the Committee on Labor and Education? He was, I believe, for over a decade. Hasn't he held office over 35 years? Yet now Rep Miller admits to paying lip service to parents in a conference call where parents are not allowed to ask questions! Forgive me, Congressman Miller, but I do believe you are the status quo.

Congressman Miller also said, "Parent trigger gives parents a voice and a say in the involvement in the quality of their child's school. They have a right to be heard." Just not on this conference call, I suppose. Congressman Miller, where can Florida parents be heard and when? We'll be there.

I'm confused. No measurements?

Two great reporters asked substantive questions. It was unfortunate that Congressman Miller left before reporters were allowed to ask questions.

The first was Natasha Lindstrom. She asked: "What key measurements, Mr. Austin, are you looking for to determine if these turnarounds work?" Austin's immediate reply was, "well, this is a two steps forward, one step back type process." Say what? Mr. Austin seemed to take us on a tour of his stream of consciousness as he searched for a better reply. He talked about being a public school parent and how his daughter's school is a good school. He said the benchmarks would "not be just test scores!" He discussed his favorite topic of the day being dead animal carcasses in a turnaround school where parents were forced to demand the carcasses be removed for health reasons. He concluded with, "if parents are happy with their child's education, then it's successful." That's a nice, straightforward answer. However Natasha Lindstrom asked for key measurements which, as you know, dangles over the heads of public school educators like a cleaver hung with dental floss.

To add to my confusion. Parent Revolution's website states their goal is "to improve academic outcomes." How does Mr. Austin expect to accomplish that without key measurements as factors? Perhaps they will change their goal to read "happy parents" so the website is properly aligned with what its Director says.

I'm confused. Relevant?

Next up was the K-12 News Network journalist, Cynthia Liu. Her spot-on question and follow up went directly to the core of the controversy over parent trigger. "Aren't the examples you gave of effective parent petitions at Haddon Elementary and 24th Street Elementary evidence that Parent Revolution is irrelevant?" Boom!

Remarkably, the most memorable quote of the call followed that question when Mr. Austin said: "Parents don't need Parent Revolution." (No kidding, he actually said that!)

He explained that parents can work through PTAs and local school councils with grassroots petitions. Gee, Parents Across Florida has said that for years. Then Mr. Austin gave a lengthy example of a Los Angeles school that organized a protest demanding common sense changes. He said no one responded to them. So Parent Revolution, he concluded, is needed. It is relevant in cases like that.

However, if I'm not mistaken, the example he provided when no one empowered responded to parents was one that Parent Revolution was already involved in. Could that be why parent's demands went unanswered? Could it be that the school was paralyzed over the turmoil created by a controversial third party with a reputation for instigating long court battles and creating divisiveness in communities?

I'm confused. Petition names can be rescinded?

The holy crow moment for me was when Mr. Austin stated: "Of course parents can rescind their names from a petition." How many months of turmoil did the Adelanto, CA court case cost when their organization refused to allow parents to rescind their names and took them to court? How much did that cost taxpayers? Say what?

In what seemed to be a teeter-totter pattern of responding in this call, Ben Austin then jumped on the other side to say: "But, of course, signing a petition is just like voting." He gave an example of someone who voted for President Obama in November but then chose to rescind afterwards. While the analogy is interesting, it simply doesn't apply. A petition on a clipboard shoved at you by someone guaranteeing they'll "improve the school with nurses, after school care, more books, etc." while you're dashing off to work is a far cry from casting a vote for President on election day. Good try though.

I learned that July 28th is National Parents Day.I learned that a school in Los Angeles has a problem with dead animal carcasses being removed.I learned that Parent Revolution sees parents as "them and us."I learned that a long time chair of an education committee says he wants to give parents a voice-- now.I learned that as much as I try to understand Parent Revolution's position, their Executive Director confuses me.

John White is implying that principals can't be trusted to determine which of their teachers are "effective" but says TRUST is essential in moving forward with his deeply flawed COMPASS. Common sense should be telling our legislators and the public that when teachers of high performing students receive ratings of ineffective based on student test scores that the methodology is bogus for ALL!

This message was sent to me from Herb Bassett and he asked it be shared because most teachers will be left in the dark. Herb was the teacher who testified before the state legislature with proof that White is manipulating the flawed School Performance Scores and teacher evaluation metric. He got their attention and yet no action was taken to investigate White's continued shenanigans. Please share this information. Herb has offered to assist any teacher who feels they have questions regarding their COMPASS scores. He can assimilate anecdotal info statewide and present it to our legislators who instructed White to engage in further conversation with Herb as this process unfolds.

Some 50 teachers of high performing students have had their VAM rankings cancelled. Those teachers had a majority of students at Mastery, Advanced, or Excellent, but received VAM rankings of ineffective. LDOE has decided that they should be evaluated on their SLTs instead.

Not all of them know this yet. Should one get in contact with you here are the official documents or they can e-mail me and I will help:

I posted some info on Facebook on the LA Public Teachers page earlier today. I do not think that word has spread far, but White and LDOE at least have publicly announced how they would handle the situation.

Just wanted to be sure you were aware.

Herb

Superintendent's Message

Dear Colleagues:

The counterpart to accountability is trust. If we assign a school or educator responsibility for achieving a goal, we should trust them in setting a plan to achieve the goal. Compass is a true professional development tool only when educators see it as a tool to achieving goals for students rather than bureaucrats.

This need for trust is why last winter BESE adjusted Compassto allow principals to make the vast majority of evaluation decisions based on their own assessments of classroom performance, rather than based on data alone. It is a principal's job to understand the work teachers and students produced and to evaluate that work, after all.

Because of the need for trust, I have also indicated that the Department will be looking to expand further principals' discretionin rating educators in the year to come, starting with greater flexibility in the frequency and timing of classroom observations. This will help our principals and teachers improve in their day-to-day work. Please look for word on that flexibility in July.

At the same time, as we grant greater discretion, so too must we ensure rigor and equity in ratings, across districts and schools. We can never go back to a system that disrespects teachers by labeling 99 percent of them 'satisfactory.' This is why for the 2012-2013 school year BESE maintained the requirement that educators whose Compass data rank in the lowest ten percent receive ineffective ratings (this is roughly 1,000 out of 50,000 educators). It is also why in September the Department will issue a report showing the rigor with which schools and school districts evaluated educator performance, so that the public can have a transparent view of each district's approach.

You now have the Compass data produced in your district's classrooms. Because every district's plan for discussing the data with teachers is different, you can establish a schedule for the data to become available to educators. Please complete this brief survey if you have not yet set this schedule. Note that in CIS teachers and administrators can now see a detailed report showing students' expected and actual test scores, allowing a detailed accounting of how test scores resulted in the Compass data. Please be sure to establish a point person in your district for teachers to contact if they have questions about this report or other aspects of the process.

Please remember that the Compass data are one data point among others, including student learning targets and observation. The data should be used in combination with those other measures to arrive at the final rating. In a small number of cases, districts have requested that the Department declare Compass data invalid due to mechanical or timing issues. We have responded to these requests, but if you have other issues to raise, you can email us here. In roughly 50 cases statewide, I have determined to hold the data of specific teachers for further review. In these cases, the majority of students were performing at 'advanced,' 'mastery, or 'excellent,' but the ratings placed the teacher as ineffective. As we move toward greater discretion for principals, I believe these specific cases merit further study and consideration and have thus asked our team to list them as 'pending future study' in your reports.

Finally, the sharing of these data is the next step in our Compass process for this year. Districts will use this information to determine final ratings for teachers in the next month, and the Department will be releasing a Compass report in September summarizing our state's overall outcomes for the year. Per state law, these data shared with districts this week and any individual Compass data are not to be shared publicly.

Like any tool, Compass is as effective as its users are effective. This means we need to trust its users, just as we need to ensure rigor and accountability on behalf of the students we are committed to serve.